alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**Proposed additions and changes to USSGL accounts (Credit Reform Guidance) – effective FY 2021**

**Proposed New USSGL Accounts:**

**Account Title:** Uncollected Subsidy from Program Account

**Account Number:**422300

**Normal Balance:**Debit

**Definition:**The amount of subsidy due to a financing account but not yet collected from a program account. This account does not close at year-end.

**Justification:**USSGL account 422100 is used with reimbursable work; however, all financial activity recorded in a financing account is classified as direct.

**Proposed Modifications to USSGL Accounts:**

**Account Title:**Unfilled Customer Orders Without Advance

**Account Number:**422100

**Normal Balance:**Debit

**Definition:**The total amount of unearned reimbursable orders accepted without an advance. This account represents the amount of goods and/or services to be furnished for other Federal Government agencies and for the public, if permitted by law and by long-standing, generally accepted practice. It also includes amounts for "jointly supported projects." At the time goods and/or services are furnished, the amount becomes reimbursements earned. ~~In addition, this account is used in the credit financing fund to record the subsidy that will be received when previously obligated loans are disbursed.~~ This account does not close at year-end.

**Justification:**To remove the definition line that discusses subsidy as it will be accounted for in USSGL account 422300.

**Proposed Modifications to TCs:**

**C101**To record the transfer of recognized subsidy from the program fund to the financing fund. 

**Reference:**USSGL implementation guidance; federal Credit Reform Program Basic Accounting and Reporting Guide 

**Budgetary Entry**

~~Debit 422100 Unfilled Customer Orders Without Advance~~

Debit 422300 Uncollected Subsidy from Program Account

   Credit 407000 Anticipated Collections From federal Sources 

**Proprietary Entry**

None

**C103**To record the collection of subsidy costs in the financing account. 

**Reference:**USSGL implementation guidance; federal Credit Reform Program Basic Accounting and Reporting Guide 

**Budgetary Entry**

Debit 427100 Actual Program Fund Subsidy Collected 

   Credit 407000 Anticipated Collections From federal Sources 

~~Credit 422100 Unfilled Customer Orders Without Advance~~

   Credit 422300 Uncollected Subsidy from Program Account

**Proprietary Entry**

Debit 101000 Fund Balance With Treasury 

   Credit 138900 Allowance for Subsidy - Loans - Troubled Assets Relief Program 

   Credit 139900 Allowance for Subsidy 

   Credit 218000 Loan Guarantee Liability
Revolution UAS LLC, 14812 N. 60th St, Scottsdale, AZ 85254

October 19, 2015 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

Docket Management System 

1200 New Jersey Ave., SE 

Washington, DC 20590 

Re: Request for Amendment to Exemption No. 12640, Regulatory Docket No. FAA–2015–2422

under Section 333 of the FAA Reform Act and Part 11 of the Federal Aviation Regulations. 

Dear Sir or Madam: 

Pursuant to Section 333 of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (the “Reform Act”) and 

14 C.F.R. Part 11, Revolution UAS, LLC (Revolution UAS), seeks to amend exemption No. 12640, 

Regulatory Docket No. FAA–2015–2422; Submitted by Revolution UAS for review May 27, 2015 

and subsequently granted by the FAA on August 27, 2015. 

The original exemption made a request to allow operations of one airframe models for conducting

aerial photography and videography used to support a broad variety of inspection and ground 

truth operations.

There have been no changes in the request for exemption from specific regulations or conditions 

and reasons relative to public interest and safety that were the basis for granting the original 

exemption. 

This letter requests the addition of additional Airframe models for commercial use in the 

aforementioned service operations. We are petitioning for exemption to enable Revolution UAS to 

operate additional UAS platforms that have been previously approved by exemption or currently 

under review. Namely: 

 The DJI Phantom 3 is a quadcopter rotor aircraft that has been included in over 14 

exemptions through mid-June, most notably Nos. 11824, 11837 and 11696 were 

granted for use in aerial missions similar to those requested to be conducted by 

Revolution UAS

 The DJI Inspire 1 is a quadcopter rotor aircraft that has been included in over 95

exemptions through mid-June, most notably Nos. 11843, 11822, 11774 and 11742 

were granted for use in aerial missions similar to those requested to be conducted by 

Revolution UAS.

These sUAS all weigh less than 55 lbs, have a built- in capability to limit the height flown above the 

ground, to limit the radius of the distance it flies from the operator and to exclude it from Class B, C 

and D airspace including a no fly zone feature. Each system also has the failsafe function of the 
[Type here]

autopilot system, which means when the communication between the Main Controller and the 

transmitter is lost, the system will automatically trigger Return to Home and will land safely. 

This submission does not include the Operating Manuals for sUAS requested above, as they have 

been reviewed by the Administrator in granting previous exemptions. Copies of all Operating 

Manuals for the individual models listed will be submitted on request and are publicly available at 

the links below:

http://www.dji.com/product/phantom-3/download

http://www.dji.com/product/inspire-1/download

Regards, 

Doug Andriuk

Co-Founder

Revolution UAS, LLC

14812 N. 60th St

Scottsdale, AZ 85254

301-266-2011
11TH COURT OF APPEALS

EASTLAND, TEXAS

JUDGMENT

In the interest of K.R.G., Jr., a child, * From the 326th District Court

of Taylor County,

Trial Court No. 7719-CX.

No. 11-16-00025-CV * July 20, 2016

* Memorandum Opinion by Bailey, J.

(Panel consists of: Wright, C.J., 

Bailey, J., and Countiss, sitting by

assignment)

(Willson, J., not participating)

This court has inspected the record in this cause and concludes that there 

is no error in the order below. Therefore, in accordance with this court’s 

opinion, the order of the trial court is in all things affirmed.
Case 2:05-cv-06020-PBT Document 29-7 Filed 06/14/2006 Page 1 of 1

BLACKWATER SECURITY CONSULTING, LLC et al v. WESTCHESTER SURPLUS LINES INSURANCE COMPANY et al Doc. 29 Att. 6

Dockets.Justia.com
No. 58486.

protest 226376-K (New York).

#### W. J. Byrnes & Co. of NY, Inc. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Ekwall, J.

An examination of the record disclosing nothing that would warrant disturbing the action of the collector, which was presumptively correct, the protest was overruled.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THE SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED CONDENSED BALANCE SHEET, STATEMENTS OF EARNINGS AND CASH FLOWS AND
ACCOMPANYING NOTES AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND NOTES.
</LEGEND>
<RESTATED> 
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          FEB-28-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               FEB-28-1997
<CASH>                                           8,753
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  216,798
<ALLOWANCES>                                     9,339
<INVENTORY>                                    283,948
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               563,256
<PP&E>                                         357,239
<DEPRECIATION>                                 131,882
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 915,288
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          371,994
<BONDS>                                        202,328
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         2,184
<OTHER-SE>                                     287,394
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   915,288
<SALES>                                      2,595,873
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             2,595,873
<CGS>                                        2,383,154
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                2,383,154
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 2,862
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              18,549
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  5,016
<INCOME-TAX>                                     2,236
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              2,780
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     2,780
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.15
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.15
        

</TABLE>
Exhibit
32.1


CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO


18
U.S.C. SECTION 1350 AND EXCHANGE ACT RULES 13a-14(b)
AND 15d-14(b)


(Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002)





Pursuant
to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of
Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code), each of the
undersigned officers of Tongli Pharmaceuticals (USA), Inc. (the “Company”), does
hereby certify, to such officer's knowledge, that:





The
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended December 31, 2008 of the
Company fully complies, in all material respects, with the requirements of
section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and the
information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.




Dated:
      February 11, 2009
                    By:
                    /s/
      Yao MingliName:   Yao
      MingliTitle:     Chief
      Executive OfficerDated:
      February 11, 2009
                    By:
                    /s/
      Yibin YangName:   Yibin
      YangTitle:     Chief
      Financial
Officer
FOR THE THREE MONTHS ENDED
    
    
    FOR THE THREE MONTHS ENDEDSeptember 30, 2010
    
    
    September 30, 2009MERRILL LYNCH
    
    
    MERRILL LYNCH
    
    
    MERRILL LYNCH
    
    
    MERRILL LYNCHPREFERRED
    
    
    PREFERRED
    
    
    PREFERRED
    
    
    PREFERREDCAPITAL TRUST V
    
    
    FUNDING V, L.P.
    
    
    CAPITAL TRUST V
    
    
    FUNDING V, L.P.Earnings
    
    $
    15,949
    
    
    $
    18,579
    
    
    $
    15,949
    
    
    $
    18,582Fixed charges
    
    $
    
    
    
    $
    
    
    
    $
    
    
    
    $
    Preferred securities
distribution
requirements
    
    
    15,470
    
    
    
    15,949
    
    
    
    15,470
    
    
    
    15,949Total combined fixed
charges and preferred
securities distribution
requirements
    
    $
    15,470
    
    
    $
    15,949
    
    
    $
    15,470
    
    
    $
    15,949Ratio of earnings to
combined fixed charges
and preferred securities
distribution requirements
    
    
    1.03
    
    
    
    1.16
    
    
    
    1.03
    
    
    
    1.17FOR THE SIX MONTHS ENDED
    
    
    FOR THE SIX MONTHS ENDEDSeptember 30, 2010
    
    
    September 30, 2009MERRILL LYNCH
    
    
    MERRILL LYNCH
    
    
    MERRILL LYNCH
    
    
    MERRILL LYNCHPREFERRED
    
    
    PREFERRED
    
    
    PREFERRED
    
    
    PREFERREDCAPITAL TRUST V
    
    
    FUNDING V, L.P.
    
    
    CAPITAL TRUST V
    
    
    FUNDING V, L.P.Earnings
    
    $
    47,846
    
    
    $
    55,740
    
    
    $
    47,846
    
    
    $
    55,755Fixed charges
    
    $
    
    
    
    $
    
    
    
    $
    
    
    
    $
    Preferred securities
distribution
requirements
    
    
    46,410
    
    
    
    47,846
    
    
    
    46,410
    
    
    
    47,846Total combined fixed
charges and preferred
securities distribution
requirements
    
    $
    46,410
    
    
    $
    47,846
    
    
    $
    46,410
    
    
    $
    47,846Ratio of earnings to
combined fixed charges
and preferred securities
distribution requirements
    
    
    1.03
    
    
    
    1.16
    
    
    
    1.03
    
    
    
    1.17
No. 57246.

protests 912038-G, etc. (New York).

#### Hoffman & Solomon et al. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Oliver, C. J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the kidskin plates are similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Kung Chen Fur Corpn.*v. *United States*(29 Cust. Ct. 266, C. D. 1480), the claim for free entry under paragraph 1681 was sustained.

Ford, J., concurred.

Mollison, J., dissented for the reasons set forth in his dissenting opinion in C. D. 1480; *supra.*
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28 

IMANAGE:162577.1 -1- 

WILKE,FLEURY,HOFFELT,

GOULD &BIRNEY,LLP 

ATTORNEYS AT LAW

SAC RAMENTO [PROPOSED] ORDER SHORTENING TIME FOR HEARING ON MOTION TO WITHDRAW (No. CIV.S-04-0482 LKK DAD)

WILKE, FLEURY, HOFFELT, GOULD & BIRNEY, LLP 

ANTHONY J. DECRISTOFORO (SBN 166171) 

400 Capitol Mall, Twenty-Second Floor 

Sacramento, CA 95814 

Telephone: (916) 441-2430 

Facsimile: (916) 442-6664 

DANIEL P. MAGUIRE (SBN 191666) 

423 E Street 

Davis, CA 95626 

Telephone: (530) 750-3661 

Facsimile: (530) 750-3793 

Attorneys for Defendants 

MARK FUKUHARA, DOUGLAS BURLAND, STEVEN 

LEACH, DAN SALOMON and JOE SILVA 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

OPHTHALMIC IMAGING SYSTEMS, a 

California corporation, 

Plaintiff, 

vs. 

MARK FUKUHARA, an individual, 

DOUGLAS BURLAND, an individual, 

MICHAEL GERKOVICH, an individual, 

STEVEN LEACH, an individual, 

EDMUND PETERSON, an individual, 

DAN SALOMON, an individual, JOE 

SILVA, an individual, DALE 

BRODSKY, an individual, 

EYEPICTURES, INC., a Missouri 

Corporation, JUSTICE OPHTHALMICS, 

INC., a Tennessee Corporation, ZETA 

DEVELOPMENT LABS, INC., a 

Tennessee Corporation, JOHNNY 

JUSTICE, JR., an individual, DOES ONE 

through TEN, 

Defendants. 

No. CIV.S-04-0482 LKK DAD 

ORDER SHORTENING TIME FOR 

HEARING ON MOTION 

TO WITHDRAW 

Attorneys Daniel P. Maguire (“Maguire”) and Wilke, Fleury, Hoffelt, Gould & Birney, 

LLP (“Wilke Fleury”) have submitted an Application for an order shortening time for the hearing 

Case 2:04-cv-00482-LKK -DAD Document 146 Filed 08/22/05 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28 

162577.1 -2- 

WILKE,FLEURY,HOFFELT,

GOULD &BIRNEY,LLP 

ATTORNEYS AT LAW

SAC RAMENTO [PROPOSED] ORDER SHORTENING TIME FOR HEARING ON MOTION TO WITHDRAW (No. CIV.S-04-0482 LKK DAD)

on their motion to withdraw as counsel for Defendants Joe Silva and Douglas Burland. The Court 

having reviewed the papers submitted and good cause appearing therefor, the Application for 

order shortening time is GRANTED. 

IT IS ORDERED THAT: 

A hearing on Maguire’s and Wilke Fleury’s motion to withdraw shall take place on 

August 29, 2005, at 10:00 a.m. in Courtroom 4. 

Maguire and Wilke Fleury shall cause the moving papers to be personally served on Mr. 

Silva and Mr. Burland and shall file the Proof of Service once service has been completed. 

Any opposition to the motion shall be filed by August 25, 2005. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

DATED: August 22, 2005 /s/ Lawrence K. Karlton 

HONORABLE LAWRENCE K. KARLTON 

SENIOR, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

Case 2:04-cv-00482-LKK -DAD Document 146 Filed 08/22/05 Page 2 of 2
II 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 3956 

To include phosphate and potash on the final list of critical minerals of 

the Department of the Interior. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MARCH 14, 2024 

Mr. TILLIS (for himself, Mr. BROWN, Mr. MARSHALL, Mr. RICKETTS, Mr. 

SCOTT of Florida, and Ms. BALDWIN) introduced the following bill; which 

was read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural 

Resources 

A BILL 

To include phosphate and potash on the final list of critical 

minerals of the Department of the Interior. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. INCLUSION OF PHOSPHATE AND POTASH AS 

4 CRITICAL MINERALS. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—The list of critical minerals pub6 lished in the notice of the Secretary of the Interior entitled 

7 ‘‘2022 Final List of Critical Minerals’’ (87 Fed. Reg. 

8 10381 (February 24, 2022)) shall be deemed to include 

9 phosphate and potash. 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 3956 IS

1 (b) RECOMMENDATIONS.—Not later than 90 days 

2 after the date of enactment of this section, the Secretary 

3 of the Interior shall evaluate current policies relating to 

4 permitting and leasing of projects to develop the minerals 

5 described in subsection (a) and submit to the Committee 

6 on Energy and Natural Resources of the Senate and the 

7 Committee on Natural Resources of the House of Rep8 resentatives recommendations to support domestic produc9 tion of those minerals. 

Æ 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THE SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE ANNUAL
REPORT ON FORM 10-K AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          OCT-31-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               OCT-31-1995
<CASH>                                             778
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   16,963
<ALLOWANCES>                                       133
<INVENTORY>                                     18,008
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                36,932
<PP&E>                                          21,991
<DEPRECIATION>                                  13,275
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  47,920
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           21,556
<BONDS>                                          3,551
<COMMON>                                         4,707
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                      16,213
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    47,920
<SALES>                                         71,056
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                71,056
<CGS>                                           49,250
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   49,250
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 978
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  4,252
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,164
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              3,088
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     3,088
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .77
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .77
        

</TABLE>
Exhibit
32(a)








This
Certification is being furnished and shall not be deemed “filed” for purposes of
Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or otherwise
subject to the liability of that section.  This Certification shall
not be incorporated by reference into any registration statement or other
document pursuant to the Securities Act of 1933, except as otherwise stated in
such filing.








Certification
Pursuant to Section 1350 of Chapter 63


of Title
18 of the United States Code








In
connection with the Annual Report of Indiana Michigan Power Company (the
“Company”) on Form 10-K (the “Report”) for the year ended December 31, 2007 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Michael
G. Morris, the Chief Executive Officer of the Company certify pursuant to 18
U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002 that, based on my knowledge (i) the Report fully complies with the
requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
and (ii) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.








/s/ Michael G.
Morris


Michael
G. Morris


Chief
Executive Officer








February
28, 2008








A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to
American Electric Power Company, Inc. and will be retained by American Electric
Power Company, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or
its staff upon request.
#### NORTHWEST PHYSICIANS, INC., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. AETNA U.S. HEALTHCARE, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 00-3203.

United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.

April 3, 2001.

*208Before NORRIS and DAUGHTREY, Circuit Judges, and ZATKOFF, District Judge.*

*

 The Honorable Lawrence P. Zatkoff, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Michigan, sitting by designation.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

PER CURIAM.

In this action invoking diversity of citizenship, plaintiff, Northwest Physicians, Inc., appeals from a grant of summary judgment to defendant, Aetna U.S. Healthcare. Plaintiff contends that negotiations between the parties culminated in an enforceable agreement. In dismissing two of plaintiffs theories of recovery pursuant to Civil Rule of Procedure 12(b)(6), and granting summary judgment on the third, the district court reasoned that plaintiffs claim for money damages flowing from an alleged breach of an agreement lacked merit because there was neither an enforceable contract nor a promise sufficient to support a claim of detrimental reliance.

Having carefully considered the record on appeal, the briefs of the parties, and the applicable law, we are not persuaded that the district court erred in granting judgment to defendant.

Because the reasoning which supports judgment for defendant has been articulated by the district court, the issuance of a detailed written opinion by this court would be duplicative and serve no useful purpose. Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is affirmed upon the reasoning employed by that court in its Opinions filed on February 11, 1999 and January 21, 2000.
No. 60017.

#### A. N. Deringer, Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

protests 170865-K, etc. (Ogdensburg).

Opinion by

Donlon, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of beef or veal similar in all material respects to that the subject of *Swift & Company et al.*v. *United States*(33 Cust. Ct. 212, C. D. 1655), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.